Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. San Fransisco Gay Marriages

San Fransisco Gay Marriages

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
wpfwcfquestion
101 Posts 25 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • S Offline
    S Offline
    scadaguy
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

    P B C H S 10 Replies Last reply
    0
    • S scadaguy

      Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

      P Offline
      P Offline
      Prakash Nadar
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Laws? instead of worring abou gay people getting married, i guess ppl should so something about the Guns that is available like toys.


      Prakash, India.

      S B A C T 5 Replies Last reply
      0
      • P Prakash Nadar

        Laws? instead of worring abou gay people getting married, i guess ppl should so something about the Guns that is available like toys.


        Prakash, India.

        S Offline
        S Offline
        scadaguy
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Thank you for clearing this up. I had no idea that the proliferation of guns played such an important role in marriage laws.

        S P N 3 Replies Last reply
        0
        • P Prakash Nadar

          Laws? instead of worring abou gay people getting married, i guess ppl should so something about the Guns that is available like toys.


          Prakash, India.

          B Offline
          B Offline
          brianwelsch
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Perhaps you should start a thread discussing gun control, and the pros/cons of realistic looking toys. ;) BW CP Member Homepages


          "...take what you need and leave the rest..."

          P 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • S scadaguy

            Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

            B Offline
            B Offline
            brianwelsch
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            Brian Gideon wrote: So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Though I admit I'm not really following that issue, I wondered about this bit myself. Seems pretty cut and dried to me. Even if noone goes to trial, it seems a statement that the licenses are not inding would be in order. BW CP Member Homepages


            "...take what you need and leave the rest..."

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • P Prakash Nadar

              Laws? instead of worring abou gay people getting married, i guess ppl should so something about the Guns that is available like toys.


              Prakash, India.

              A Offline
              A Offline
              Alvaro Mendez
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              But but, people do do something about the "Guns that is available like toys". They either buy them or they don't. They have a choice. Do you have that choice? Do you like having choices? Tell us Mr.Prakash, we're dying to know. ;P Regards, Alvaro BTW, last I checked buying a toy truck does not require a waiting period or background check.


              "I do" is both the shortest and the longest sentence in the English language.

              P 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • S scadaguy

                Thank you for clearing this up. I had no idea that the proliferation of guns played such an important role in marriage laws.

                S Offline
                S Offline
                Shog9 0
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                Brian Gideon wrote: I had no idea that the proliferation of guns played such an important role in marriage laws. They don't have shotgun weddings where you're from? :rolleyes:
                --- the work, which will become a new genre unto itself, will be called...

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S scadaguy

                  Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

                  C Offline
                  C Offline
                  Chris Losinger
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Brian Gideon wrote: So why isn't anyone getting arrested? the mayor apparently claims it's not illegal, or that the law forbidding it is unconstitutional (CA state constitution). so it's not really clear if he's breaking a law or not. there are lawsuits pending on both sides of the issue. at least that's what the news networks tell me. if Schwollenpecker wanted to send in the CA state troopers to arrest the mayor, he probably could - after all, he did say they represent "an imminent risk to civil order". Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer

                  A R 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • S scadaguy

                    Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

                    H Offline
                    H Offline
                    Hesham Amin
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Brian Gideon wrote: I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California. I also wonder..:wtf: how such sexual relations (out of mariage) are not forbidden ?

                    L 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • S scadaguy

                      Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

                      S Offline
                      S Offline
                      Stan Shannon
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      What is doubly interesting is what occured when a judge in Alabama broke the law in defense of traditional values juxtaposed to what happens in California when an official breaks the law to subvert those values. In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In the latter case, even the state authorities are loath to take any legal action what so ever. Very interesting. Very revealing. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                      J C S D R 5 Replies Last reply
                      0
                      • S scadaguy

                        Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

                        J Offline
                        J Offline
                        Jon Sagara
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        AFAIK, Newsom is claiming that the law against same-sex marriage is unconstitutional because it violates equal protection rights, so he's in effect demanding that the law be struck down. It is similar to Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka[^], bringing up the issue of "Separate but Equal" not really being equal.

                        Jon Sagara Vegetarianism is unhealthy. Humans need protein, and lots of it. Put down those sprouts and pick up a T-bone! -- Michael Moore
                        Latest Article: Breadcrumbs in ASP.NET

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • C Chris Losinger

                          Brian Gideon wrote: So why isn't anyone getting arrested? the mayor apparently claims it's not illegal, or that the law forbidding it is unconstitutional (CA state constitution). so it's not really clear if he's breaking a law or not. there are lawsuits pending on both sides of the issue. at least that's what the news networks tell me. if Schwollenpecker wanted to send in the CA state troopers to arrest the mayor, he probably could - after all, he did say they represent "an imminent risk to civil order". Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer

                          A Offline
                          A Offline
                          Alvaro Mendez
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          Chris Losinger wrote: Schwollenpecker :laugh: Did you come up with that one? Regards, Alvaro


                          "I do" is both the shortest and the longest sentence in the English language.

                          C N 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • S Stan Shannon

                            What is doubly interesting is what occured when a judge in Alabama broke the law in defense of traditional values juxtaposed to what happens in California when an official breaks the law to subvert those values. In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In the latter case, even the state authorities are loath to take any legal action what so ever. Very interesting. Very revealing. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                            J Offline
                            J Offline
                            Jon Sagara
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #13

                            Stan Shannon wrote: Very interesting. Very revealing. Touché. Thanks for bringing that up. [EDIT] I think the distinction is that in Alabama, the judge's actions were deemed to be in violation of the Constitution, whereas in CA the mayor is using the state constitution to override a state statute. So in AL the judge was automatically in violation of the law, but in CA it is not yet clear whether Newsom is violating the law. [/EDIT]

                            Jon Sagara Vegetarianism is unhealthy. Humans need protein, and lots of it. Put down those sprouts and pick up a T-bone! -- Michael Moore
                            Latest Article: Breadcrumbs in ASP.NET

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • S Stan Shannon

                              What is doubly interesting is what occured when a judge in Alabama broke the law in defense of traditional values juxtaposed to what happens in California when an official breaks the law to subvert those values. In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In the latter case, even the state authorities are loath to take any legal action what so ever. Very interesting. Very revealing. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Chris Losinger
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #14

                              Stan Shannon wrote: the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge you're full of it. he unveiled the monument August 1, 2001. the ACLU, not "the feds" sued in Jan 02. the federal district court didn't rule against Moore until November 2002 - that's more than a year afterwards. and, then the order was stayed, by the same judge in Jan 03. and the thing stayed there until late 03. that's more than two years, of course. yeah, no time wasted at all. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer

                              S 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • S Stan Shannon

                                What is doubly interesting is what occured when a judge in Alabama broke the law in defense of traditional values juxtaposed to what happens in California when an official breaks the law to subvert those values. In the former case, the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge. In the latter case, even the state authorities are loath to take any legal action what so ever. Very interesting. Very revealing. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                                S Offline
                                S Offline
                                scadaguy
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #15

                                I was hoping someone would bring that up. Interesting indeed!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • A Alvaro Mendez

                                  Chris Losinger wrote: Schwollenpecker :laugh: Did you come up with that one? Regards, Alvaro


                                  "I do" is both the shortest and the longest sentence in the English language.

                                  C Offline
                                  C Offline
                                  Chris Losinger
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #16

                                  nope. :) Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S scadaguy

                                    Can someone explain this to me. I understand that issuing a marriage license to same sex couples in California is against the law. In fact, it is a criminal offense. So why isn't anyone getting arrested? Furthermore, since the licenses were obtained illegally then they aren't binding right? So those couples who thought they got married really aren't? This is not a post about whether or not same sex marriages should be legal. I'm simply asking for clarification on how laws work in California.

                                    A Offline
                                    A Offline
                                    AdventureBoy
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #17

                                    F*ck the law, the laws need to be changed. People need to make decisions about what should and shouldn't be by using valid reasoning about what is right and wrong. Any form of prejudice is flat-out wrong. Have you all lost the ability to think for yourselves? There probably still exist racially-prejudice laws that noone has gotten around to officially erasing. Would you question why these law are no longer enforced? Complete legalizing of homosexuality is inevitable. Being somewhat conservative, America is a bit behind some other countries in recognition of homosexuality as a valid type of relationship, equal in every way to hetero relationships and hetero marriages. America will catch up with the times eventually though. This issue will continue to be debated until the laws are corrected. Ooooh... this is sure to spark some debate! ;P Why is the phrase "It's none of my business" always followed by "BUT..." ;P

                                    S B S S N 5 Replies Last reply
                                    0
                                    • C Chris Losinger

                                      Stan Shannon wrote: the feds wasted no time in ignoring states rights to intervene to stop the judge you're full of it. he unveiled the monument August 1, 2001. the ACLU, not "the feds" sued in Jan 02. the federal district court didn't rule against Moore until November 2002 - that's more than a year afterwards. and, then the order was stayed, by the same judge in Jan 03. and the thing stayed there until late 03. that's more than two years, of course. yeah, no time wasted at all. Cleek | Losinger Designs | ClickPic | ThumbNailer

                                      S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Stan Shannon
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #18

                                      I won't quibble over what "wasted no time" means, but I still think the differences in attitudes towards two acts of defying legal authority is telling. Clearly, the only moral agenda in our society which is sanctioned by the state, and defended by the full power of the legal system, is that of secularism. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                                      C 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • P Prakash Nadar

                                        Laws? instead of worring abou gay people getting married, i guess ppl should so something about the Guns that is available like toys.


                                        Prakash, India.

                                        C Offline
                                        C Offline
                                        Christian Graus
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #19

                                        This is plain dumb. Just because the US has one pressing social issue, does that mean that nothing else can be discussed ? Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • A AdventureBoy

                                          F*ck the law, the laws need to be changed. People need to make decisions about what should and shouldn't be by using valid reasoning about what is right and wrong. Any form of prejudice is flat-out wrong. Have you all lost the ability to think for yourselves? There probably still exist racially-prejudice laws that noone has gotten around to officially erasing. Would you question why these law are no longer enforced? Complete legalizing of homosexuality is inevitable. Being somewhat conservative, America is a bit behind some other countries in recognition of homosexuality as a valid type of relationship, equal in every way to hetero relationships and hetero marriages. America will catch up with the times eventually though. This issue will continue to be debated until the laws are corrected. Ooooh... this is sure to spark some debate! ;P Why is the phrase "It's none of my business" always followed by "BUT..." ;P

                                          S Offline
                                          S Offline
                                          Stan Shannon
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #20

                                          AdventureBoy wrote: this is sure to spark some debate! Ok, here you go. AdventureBoy wrote: People need to make decisions about what should and shouldn't be by using valid reasoning about what is right and wrong. They did. AdventureBoy wrote: Have you all lost the ability to think for yourselves? So unless we agree with you we aren't thinking for ourselves? AdventureBoy wrote: There probably still exist racially-prejudice laws that noone has gotten around to officially erasing. Would you question why these law are no longer enforced? Red Herring. AdventureBoy wrote: legalizing of homosexuality is inevitable. Being somewhat conservative, America is a bit behind some other countries in recognition of homosexuality as a valid type of relationship, equal in every way to hetero relationships and hetero marriages. Does every form of sexual perverson deserve its own set of special rights? And will we all be forced by the law to accept behavior we find morally unacceptable simply because the state tells us we have to. Sure, the U.S. is behind the rest of the world - in tyranny, we would kind of like to keep it that way. AdventureBoy wrote: America will catch up with the times eventually though. This issue will continue to be debated until the laws are corrected. Unfortunantly, you are probably right. We will be forced down the same statest path as Canada. Whatever the state says is normal, is normal, and to hell with free exercise of religion. The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism, but under then name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened. - Norman Thomas, Socialist Party Presidential candidate

                                          J A 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups